What Is an Author?

I. Derridean concentrations on the discursive practices of writing as a supplement to authorial ‘intention’ fail to address the notion of a ‘subject‘
   A. An analysis of concepts or relations has been previously ancillary to privileged idealization of authorship.
       1. this valuation of the author’s individuality breaks down in certain analyses of the subject and its work
   B. The theory of a person writing’s irrelevant immediacy, while never fully realized, does comprise two “major themes.”
       1. contemporarily, writing is supposed as free expression of significant nature eliding the illusion of subjectivity
       2. this is done as well psychologically in order to preserve traces of writer’s own existence beyond the tomb
   C. western/European/Critical culture is a sacrificial game of symbolically exchanging the author’s death for one’s absense.
       1. this results in a simultaneous privilege and supression the author’s invisibility in the form of denial
       2. insistence on ‘the work, itself’ is also problematical in terms of authenticity and intention (never to be platonically known)
       3. acceptance of authorial works has yet to be fully excavated to the level of producing a consistent theory for the act of authorship
   D. Simply factoring the individual who writes (or wrote) out is not sufficient for preserving the integrity of the work and its subject.
       1. however, writing as an idea allows one to eclipse the author temporarily as well as make sense of this disappearance
       2. simply ascribing all effects of writing to the author’s himself or the work it created results in impractical dichotomies of either critical or analytical methodologies (or delusion that there is n/one)
   E. The thought that it’s been like this before, so you know it is now—that died in the eighteen-hundreds (though some still await its Second Coming).

II. The author’s disappearance is not uniform and therefore allows us to make determinations about its gaps and ruptures as openings uncovered by the death of the subject-which-writes
   A. Simply identifying bodies of work or ‘text’ by an authorial signifier offers dilemmas.
       1. it is practically impossible to know what is meant by the reference to an author’s proper name
       2. the title’s referring as well to a collection of works, which may not be stable
       3. this makes it possible to question the usage of a name
           a. In reality, just a useful shorthand for denoting a classification of texts and their affiliated practices
           b. If you think the subjective consciousness that wrote this just simply ‘is’ the person who sat at a bar hypothetically drunk thinking it over, you…
              1 need to get out a little more and 
              2 “within a society.”
       4. the author’s function is a cultural construction (specific to a time, place and people) which produces authoritative discourse
       5. discursivity is an act grown through repetition and adaptation into a product or procedure within an economics of difference
           a. In the industrial age, rules had to be prescribed for textual relations of ownership and compensation
   B. This operation of practices for textual affiliations is neither standard nor uniform in acquiring new classificatory values over time.
       1. between the seventeenth and eighteenth century, science became autonomous, while literature was born as the product of an individual author’s mind
   C. The author function is a deliberate consctruction for assigning value to works based on an ideological set of criteria.
       1. were developed through veneration and exegesis of religious texts
       2. modern application enforces rigid standards of normativity in determining authenticity
       3. the same definition of authorship in relation to one’s subjective and personal traits remains
   D. Formal characteristics do indicate that someone wrote a particular work or text.
       1. but even personal expressions contain signs of “this plurality of self”
   E. This operation, grown from a juridical system, is uneven in its effects of a specifically complicated nature and can not be simplistically equivocated with any one ‘true’ individual.

III. Authorship can apply to far more than textual work of the book
   A. Certain class of authors developed in the nineteenth century who worked in a quasi-religiously secular vein of science as knowledge in writing.
   B. There is, however, an essential split between these fictions useful for conceiving reality and those which merely influence later productions.
   C. Because only those authors which presuppose and supercede objection, refutation are to be considered of importance.

IV. What is most at stake is the potential for independent development within the foundation of an author’s production of knowledge
   A. However, in science the foundation of a new form of understanding is prevalent to later developments based on it.
       1. but in discursive realignments, a potential field of applications is opened up which are not dependent on the origin
       2. though scientific and theoretical statements can be considered with respect to validity, in reality each refers back to a starting point differently
   B. Science is not merely subjective, but neither is it the foundation of all theories as principle. 

V. To conclude, I would like to review the reasons why I attach a certain importance to what I have said
   A. Simply examining empirical objects is not sufficient for organizing typological categories, particularly in authorship.
       1. looking at shades of reality instead of meaning, a much more valuable method
       2. though sounds counter-intuitive, setting all that aside to aid one getting to the real questions of author as subject
   B. Stating authorship has an ideological component is not to denigrate its author, but rather grants the privileged access to other points of view.
   C. ‘the Author’ is a practical construction for restricting too numerous possibilities of a meaning to a less fearful dimension.
   D. “the author function” performs a dual role of apparently mutual exclusivity in reinforcing authorial stereotypes with the potential to redirect them to more useful applications.
   E. It’s what allows the writer to demonstrate this about authors and language within a fair amount of work/th.

philosophicumaequaevum.we.bs/Contemporary-Philosophy/Archive/athecave/awetour.htm